Senate Race in Tar Heel State Results in Gun Debate

The state motto of North Carolina is “Esse Quam Videri” or “to be rather than to seem.” This is an appropriate phrase concerning the current race between Senator Richard Burr and challenger Deborah Ross. Though one outcome may seem likely, the race between the two is relatively close, with what is yet to be still fairly uncertain.

Currently serving his second term in the U.S. Senate, Republican Richard Burr has many times stood in support of the Second Amendment. He recently took part in a vote against the expansion of background checks proposed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, giving the U.S. Justice Department more say in prohibiting gun sales based on suspected terrorism. Also voted against by Senator Burr was an attempt by Sen. Chris Murphy to eradicate the so-called “gun show loophole,” which would greatly impact gun sales as a whole, mandating purchases regardless of sales venue.

Another action Sen. Burr has taken in the name of preserving firearms freedoms is blocking Supreme Court nominees with an anti-gun agenda. At the same time, he has stood firm on issues such as concealed carry reciprocity for those with permits, and legislation to insulate rights of veterans protected by the Second Amendment. Burr has also backed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), thereby safeguarding firearms dealers and manufacturers against liability for acts committed with the products they manufacture and sell. He has also voted against bans on “assault weapons” and high-capacity magazines.

In an interview with Debra Morgan, Sen. Burr had the following to say about Second Amendment rights: “I’m committed to make sure that the Second Amendment is not infringed on in any way, shape or form. And I don’t buy the President’s argument that an assault weapon was made to hunt. No, an assault weapon was made to allow an American to defend themselves and their property – the exact reason the Second Amendment was created by our founding fathers. They didn’t create the amendment for us to have the ability to hunt. And anything we would do to limit the American people to have that right protected would be an infringement to the Second Amendment.”

On the other side of the argument is Democratic challenger and former state legislator Deborah Ross. Although Ross considers herself a supporter of the Second Amendment, her actions indicate that this statement is not without a margin note. Not only has the NRA noticed this and given her an “F” rating, but they have also released ads against her, stating that she voted for gun control and against self-defense. One such example of her stance is her opposition to concealed carry in restaurants and state parks.

High on the list of changes she wishes to see are gun control measures such as expanded background checks. Ross argues this could be a way to prohibit gun crime in the future, indicating that now is the time to act in order to make this a reality. She also advocates utilizing our military and intelligence as a means to bring about improved national security, which happens to coincide with gun control.

On her website, Ross stated that: “Commonsense gun safety laws in our country already prohibit violent criminals from purchasing a firearm; however, a loophole in existing law does not stop a suspected terrorist or an individual on the no-fly list from buying a gun. Unfortunately, thousands of these purchases have gone through, and al Qaeda leaders have actively encouraged extremists to exploit this weakness to buy a firearm. If someone is too dangerous to get on a plane, they’re too dangerous to buy a deadly firearm. Period.”

There is much at stake in this senate race, as the election nears and Ross and Burr continue to campaign. For those who have yet to make up their mind, or are curious about the topic of gun rights, tune into an hour-long debate between the North Carolina candidates on October 13th and see for yourself who suits you best.

Images from Facebook

What's Your Reaction?

Like

LikeLoveHahaWowSadAngry

6 thoughts on “Senate Race in Tar Heel State Results in Gun Debate”

There is no “gun show loophole”. It doesn’t exist. Go to any gun show & you will have to go through a background check the same as in any firearms store. This get old.
Hat off to Burr. He at least has an understanding of what the Bill of Rights is.

I have bought my share of guns. Online,gun shows and gun stores. All i can say is I always have to fill out a registration and they make a call to check on me. If it was bought online the gun still goes to a dealer first and we go through the same process. I do not know what state these people are in that claim that gun shows do not check on the buyer. I personal think they have never checked out for their self or just want to make up some story about guns being sold without a background check.

If there must be background checks, let’s try this idea…
Are there any ‘legislators’ that are interested in a Constitutional
Background Check?

Since SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED means exactly that..

Let’s try a “Background Check” that DOES NOT INFRINGE on anybodies RIGHTS…
A FULL, IN DEPTH background check for ALL Politicians, Bureaucrats, and ALL government employees, and set MINIMAL INTELLIGENCE, JOB SKILLS AND CHARACTER QUALITIES that must be met
before they can run for office, be appointed or hired.

That way, WE, THE PEOPLE, get a much better class of politicians and
bureaucrats, as well as EMPLOYEES that can be trained to do the jobs they are being hired for.

Any bets on how hard the political class will fight to prevent it?

THAT would be a Background Check that nearly ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS will support and I don’t much care if the illegals and their sycophants don’t like the idea.

If the government can revoke your right to access firearms simply because it has decided to place you on a secret, notoriously inaccurate list, it could presumably restrict your other rights in a similar manner. You could be forbidden from advocating for causes you believe in, or associating with like-minded activists; your right against intrusive, unreasonable searches could be suspended. And you would have no recourse: The government could simply declare that, as a name on a covert list, you are owed no due process at all.

President Obama and Hillary Clinton are wrong to think that arbitrary lists are a valid and legal means of stripping Americans of their gun rights.

It would be nice if the Republican Party had chosen as its standard-bearer someone who could articulate the conservative case for the Second Amendment and due process. Instead, it chose Trump. Now gun rights will be in jeopardy, no matter which of the two charlatans currently seeking the presidency prevails.

One million plus new felons, all armed with scary, high capacity,
media labeled assault weapons!

The deadline for New York residents to register their so called
“Assault Weapons” and “High” (read standard) Capacity Magazines came and went.

An estimated million plus, formerly law abiding, gun owners have
refused to comply with Cuomo and down state Democrat’s naive belief that the NY Safe Act, passed in a so called emergency session of the New York legislature, could force free people to register their hard earned property.

And who can blame these once lawful gun owners, with a president that
picks and chooses which laws he will follow or enforce, as well as an Federal Attorney General that operates daily with a Contempt of Congress charge and gun running scandal, “Fast & Furious”, hanging over his head. Why should the average New York joe, bother to follow the law, especially when it is in direct conflict with the Constitution of the United States, the one true law of the land.
ammoland